Yari vs. WB over "Veil"

email this story
read comments (27)
post a comment

"When the studios are in for a penny, they're in for a pound. When you're giving them product, then their nose is in the wind a lot more. If it smells good, they'll run with it. But if it doesn't, they're not invested in it." -- The Painted Veil star Edward Norton to Hollywood Reporter/"Risky Business" columnist Anne Thompson in her 12.18 column.

This is the money quote that pretty much explains why Veil producer Bob Yari is flustered about what he sees as faint Warner Bros. support in terms of "For Your Consideration" Oscar ads for The Painted Veil. The bottom line is that Warner Bros. honchos have put a damp finger to the wind and decided that the film doesn't smell all that good -- that it's a respectable stiff.

This despite its high-pedigree credentials (an adaptation of a Somerset Maugham novel, shot in rural Chinese locations, well-rendered 1920s period sets and costumes), mildly interesting performances and Stuart Dryburgh's eye-filling cinematography. As Slant's Jason Clark has written, Veil "is more or less from the school of motion picture that Pauline Kael used to say 'reeks of quality.'" And the import of the story....good heavens.

It's basically about how a pretty young British woman (Noami Watts), under pressure from her parents to find a suitable mate, marries a dweeby stuffed-shirt bacteriologist (Norton)...and gradually comes to love and respect him for his character and steadiness and compassion for Chinese peasants afflicted with cholera. The message, in short, is that humorless prigs with commendable inner qualities make good husbands as long as the woman in question gives up all those immature ideas about heady romantic attraction, great sex and other spirit-lifting chemistries.

Watching this film a few weeks ago made me feel frustrated, impatient, bored -- bees were buzzing in my head. 70 minutes into it I got up and asked the projec- tionist how much time was left, and when he told me there was another 55 minutes to go my heart just sank. I went back to my seat and told The Envelope's Tom O'Neil, who was sitting next to me, "I can't do this"...and I left. As I was driving out of the parking garage I saw a woman who'd been sitting behind O'Neil and myself walking up the ramp. "You left too?" I asked. "Oh, God...please!", she replied.

Yari, naturally, believes in the film and is fighting for it tooth and nail -- the mark of a good producer. But The Painted Veil is one respectably doomed film if I ever saw one. That said, 67% of the Rotten Tomatoes critics who've posted so far have raved, liked it or gave it a qualified pass.

L.A. Times film reporter John Horn has written a similar piece about the same kettle of fish.

Delivery devices<< previous | next >>Southeastern Film Critics

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on December 18, 2006 at 7:55 AM

comment #1

christian says ...

so...no hot sex scene?

Posted by christian at December 18, 2006 11:07 AM

comment #2

Noel Murray says ...

Over at Screengrab, Bilge E. raises a legitimate question: Would critics be as impatient with a movie like THE PAINTED VEIL if it weren't awards season, and there weren't so many other things to see and do? In other words, would you be more likely to get something out of the movie if it *weren't* being positioned as a contending release, but was instead rolling out in mid-April?

I haven't seen the movie yet, because Warners didn't send screeners to my critics' org, but if I had gotten one, I bet it would be sitting in my "low priority" pile, next to CATCH A FIRE and BLOOD DIAMOND. Which is kind of a shame.

Posted by Noel Murray at December 18, 2006 11:31 AM

comment #3

Rich S. says ...

Relating this to another recent thread, Jeremy Irons won an Oscar for Reversal of Fortune and what did it get him? Supporting roles in Dungeons and Dragons and Eragon.

In light of that, tell me again, exactly, why these awards are so damn prestigious?

Posted by Rich S. at December 18, 2006 11:42 AM

comment #4

christian says ...

work forever if you're an actor is the main gift.

Posted by christian at December 18, 2006 11:48 AM

comment #5

jeffmcm says ...

A bad movie from the director of We Don't Live Here Anymore? I give that a dripping-with-sarcasm noooo.

Posted by jeffmcm at December 18, 2006 11:50 AM

comment #6

Mike Schaefer says ...

I liked "We Don't Live Here Anymore" a lot, actually -- great Laura Dern perf.

But this item makes me wonder: Is Yari spending as much promoting his Illusionist's Oscar chances as he wants WIP to spend on Veil?

Posted by Mike Schaefer at December 18, 2006 11:57 AM

comment #7

The Movie Man says ...

The "prestigious film" is just about as annoying as the "loud summer blockbuster."

Posted by The Movie Man at December 18, 2006 12:10 PM

comment #8

RoyBatty says ...

Norton was so underwhelming in The Illusionist and this sounds like more of the same, have wonder if his agent/manager/girlfriend has been slipping him valium. Perhaps as a favor to end his rep as a very high-maintenance actor to work with.

Painted Veil seems like yet another one of those films that you just sit there afterward going "What on Earth about that story made someone excited enough to want to turn it into a film?"

Posted by RoyBatty at December 18, 2006 12:27 PM

comment #9

Craig Kennedy says ...

I thought Norton was fine in The Illusionist and he was good in Down in the Valley also, but something about the trailer for this movie really put me off. Was it his uptight English guy accent? I don't know, but I smelled day old Oscar bait.

With Jeff jawing at the projectionist just over an hour into the film, I can't wait to hear how he reacts to the 179 minutes of David Lynch's Inland Empire. No, I take that back. I don't want or need to know.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at December 18, 2006 12:42 PM

comment #10

Colin says ...

Hmmm...RoyBatty, I can't say that I agree with you about Norton. I thought that he was terrific in "The Illusionist," with his restraint fitting the character perfectly. And if you want to see him going "bigger" in a performance, check out "Down in the Valley." In fact, his performance in that one might be at the top of my list for the year.

I haven't seen "The Painted Veil" yet, but Norton was nominated for an Independent Spirit award for his work in it, so at least some people think highly of his performance.

Posted by Colin at December 18, 2006 12:45 PM

comment #11

renorambler says ...

To be fair, a lot of time has passed for Irons since Reversal. What was the last thing he did that was really good? I liked him in a supporting role in Stealing Beauty. I'm drawing a blank...

I suppose an Oscar only guarantees at most a 2 year window for being "hot"? Unless you deliver the goods after receiving the award. Hmmm, that "window of opportunity" thing seems like fodder for a good thread. Any thoughts...anyone? Who lost their "hot" label the quickest? (Benigni?) Who held it the longest?

Posted by renorambler at December 18, 2006 12:54 PM

comment #12

Dixon Steele says ...

Yet another donnybrook with Bob Yari.

Gotta say, I saw the trailer and wasn't jazzed, especially with Norton's weak accent.

Obviously, as the articles imply, this was a Mark Gill project, and with him gone, it's over and out.

And why isn't Yari really pulling out the Oscar stops with THE ILLUSIONIST, a critical and commercial success, in a weak year? Weird.

Posted by Dixon Steele at December 18, 2006 1:06 PM

comment #13

donnyboy says ...

the script sucked, as do most of them when Ed Norton is involved.
In this case, the story--as Maugham wrote it--is about Watt's character, and Ed a'int gunna let that happen.
So this nonsense about penny and pounds he is talking about all leads back to the large bank of ego that resides with him.

Posted by donnyboy at December 18, 2006 1:36 PM

comment #14

Movie fan09 says ...

So this nonsense about penny and pounds he is talking about all leads back to the large bank of ego that resides with him.

yep.
that ego also led him to make leap of faith.
what in the world made him think my generation actually wants suicidal singer songwriters depressing songs in a movie about the ups and downs about love?

Posted by Movie fan09 at December 18, 2006 1:51 PM

comment #15

donnyboy says ...

Also, Ed Norton is restrained because he has no range. He has no other options. I'm tired of these pikers like Norton getting cred for being oh-so understated, and Pacino getting ripped a new one because he actually is entertaining to watch and has TALENT.

Posted by donnyboy at December 18, 2006 1:53 PM

comment #16

Colin says ...

donnyboy, check out "Down in the Valley" if you want to see some range by Norton.

Posted by Colin at December 18, 2006 1:56 PM

comment #17

donnyboy says ...

Norton in Down in the Valley?

Is that sarcastic?

Dern was good.

Everyone else looked clueless.

The script was some demented offspring from a psychobabble film/sociology theory class...
The archetype of the cowboy would be forced towards insanity in this modern, evil world.....how laughable....

Truly, a story only Joseph Campbell could love.

Posted by donnyboy at December 18, 2006 2:07 PM

comment #18

dre says ...

I wouldnt say that Norton is always understated...

I certainly wouldnt call
Fight Club,
The Score
Primal Fear
Death To Smoochy
American History X
Rounders or even
Keeping The Faith

understated. Pacino is my favorite actor donny, but if you're saying Norton doesn't have talent, you might consider watching his films with both eyes open next time. I did not care for Down In The Valley (at all), but let's get realistic.

Posted by dre at December 18, 2006 2:26 PM

comment #19

christian says ...

i find ed norton the single most boring supposed great young actor around. his performance in FIGHT CLUB is sub-understated -- he could be anybody from any computer commercial. yawn.

Posted by christian at December 18, 2006 2:33 PM

comment #20

donnyboy says ...

He sure does love the Fake Retard role:

The Score
Primal Fear
and upcoming Motherless Brooklyn

But I was wrong, you're right, he does have talent. But is he great? No.

Posted by donnyboy at December 18, 2006 2:33 PM

comment #21

donnyboy says ...

dre:
If youÃ¢â‚¬â„¢re a Pacino fan you should check out the new Pacino collection of interviews by Larry Grabel (sp?) from Playboy.
Very good.

Posted by donnyboy at December 18, 2006 2:43 PM

comment #22

The Movie Man says ...

I agree with the dominant Norton is boring, Pacino rocks sentiment going on in this thread. I admit Norton fooled me for a little while, but he's a one trick pony, and that trick isn't that great. Pacino's chewed some major scenery over the years and I wouldn't take back any of it (maybe Revolution, maybe Arthur! Arthur!, ok, nobody's perfect) but at least Pacino takes chances. Norton is so damned determined to be "respected" that he forgets that its ok to actually, you know, breathe a little life and spontaniety into his characters.

And I don't get the love for DOWN IN THE VALLEY. Is it because its obscure? It's part TAXI DRIVER, part every wrong side of the tracks 1950s romance ever made, all boring.

Posted by The Movie Man at December 18, 2006 5:26 PM

comment #23

dre says ...

donny, thanks for the heads up on the pacino articles. i'll be sure to check them out.

christian, his performance in fight club was sub-understated? he was downright cartoonish (appropriately) half the time, mugging for the camera left and right. the scene where he kicks his own ass, his expressions, his body language...that ain't what I would consider understated. i would hate to see what you would consider over-the-top.

i didnt know down in the valley had so many fans. I'm certainly not one of them. definitely taxi driver influenced...only not good.

but norton is still a great actor in my book

Posted by dre at December 18, 2006 7:39 PM

comment #24

donnyboy says ...

dre:

it is a book. sorry for mix-up, trying to say that Grobel wrote for the mag

http://www.amazon.com/Al-Pacino-Lawrence-Grobel/dp/1416912118/sr=8-1/qid=1166503087/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-1630131-6337635?ie=UTF8&s=books

When told that Pauline Kael couldn't distinguish Pacino from Dustin Hoffman in Serpico, Pacino says: Is that after she had the shot glass removed from her throat?

He's funny.

Posted by donnyboy at December 18, 2006 8:40 PM

comment #25

dre says ...

Thanks, love Pacino taking a shot at Kael

Posted by dre at December 19, 2006 6:27 AM

comment #26

christian says ...

i mean sub-understated in his somnambulism. he drones instead of talks in the style of all apathetic youth in tv ads. flatline.

Posted by christian at December 19, 2006 7:20 AM

comment #27

steandric says ...

I heard an audio of Tom o'Neal talking with Ron Nyswaner about a so-called "high-profile" film critic walking out of the screening of the film, and i asked: "who's that a**hole?" Glad that there're now 80% of RT film critics going against and proving him minority who knows nothing about movies.

Posted by steandric at December 20, 2006 4:31 PM